Weekly Worker 584 Friday July 8 2005

Letters

SP homophobia

Carey Davies’s letter on the Socialist Party’s non-involvement with Respect contains a rather peculiar slander against Respect that is insidious, and throws a great deal of light on the chauvinist reasons for the SP’s non-involvement (Letters, June 30).

Some SP member, a “gay man”, is quoting as accusing Respect of “not explicitly defending gay rights” and supposedly containing “elements that would curtail them”. This anonymous SPer, whoever he is, might be interested to know that Respect’s policy on gay rights, as outlined in both national material and conference resolutions, is quite clear and unambiguous: “An end to all discrimination against lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people. For equal partnership and pension rights. For strong policies to tackle homophobia in all public bodies. For an increase in public services that meet the needs of lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgendered people, rather than money wasted on war.”

If this is not an “explicit” defence of gay rights, then I do not know what is. What is worse about this letter is the bigotry implicit in it, a bigotry that on this occasion does not dare to speak its name. Everyone knows that these references to “reactionary elements” and “elements that would curtail” gay rights are in fact islamophobic references to the fact that there are muslims prominent in Respect. The very idea that muslims could possibly be won to support a progressive stance on gay rights seems to these very staunch ‘socialists’ to be inconceivable.

Such bigotry from the SP is hardly very surprising. Islamophobia is the cutting edge of social and political reaction today, and the SP has hardly been noted for its leading role in standing up to reactionary social prejudices. One notes that, through the entire period of the Irish war from the late 1960s to the mid-1990s, the SP and its Militant forebears forswore any agitation for ‘Troops out of Ireland’ and any united front activity with those fighting British imperialism in the north.

And on the subject of homophobia, I am old enough to remember the vicious ‘queer’ and ‘lezzie’ baiting that was once the lot of activists from other left tendencies that fought for gay rights at Labour Party Young Socialists events in the 1970s and 80s, when Militant dominated that movement. In truth, Militant were among the last ‘left’ Neanderthals to be forced to recognise the justice of gay rights. Maybe in a couple of decades the SP will likewise recognise the error of their backwardness in refusing to champion muslims today. But then, given its own capitulation to islamophobia, I don’t find it that surprising that CPGB supporter Carey Davies endorses the SP’s islamophobia with the backslapping “Good point, comrade”.

Ian Donovan
South London

Principles

In response to George Galloway’s comments on his recent visit to Sheffield, I was horrified by comrade Galloway’s suggestion, aimed at those in the room not already Respect members, that joining Respect does not mean “leaving your principles behind”. Oh no. Instead it means the radically different “leaving your politics at the door” (Weekly Worker June 30).

Of course we have our differences, George, but only the foolish or opportunistic suggest we should drop these so as to lighten the burden of left unity. In fact, it is a burdensome task, but these differences must be fought out - not just before unity, but during it. These theoretical differences are the building blocks of consensus, which form stronger theoretical constructions when cemented with open, honest, democratic debate. We need democracy, accountability and representation at every layer of the working class movement, so that our ideas no longer remain hidden from each other - and ultimately ourselves - but can be expressed openly and honestly for the purposes of self-clarification and theoretical strength.

Arguments, therefore, along with principles, given his horrible stances on abortion rights, the worker’s wage and open borders, are things that comrade Galloway would seem to take lightly. The lack of principle on open borders was demonstrated at the Dungavel asylum detention centre protest earlier this week. A message from him was read out giving the impression he was in favour of open borders, whereas actually his position is for ‘controlled immigration’ - the same as New Labour and the Tories but without the detention centres.

What’s Galloway’s problem with the principles of other organisations? They are not obstacles to left unity, but the solution to it. Without principles, what’s the point in politics anyway? Is it personal glorification, by any chance, or just the opportunity to ruck with the Labour Party for the sake of revenge?

Jules Barca
Leeds

New Bragg

Many on the left, particularly those of us in our late 30s or early 40s, have fond memories of the contribution that singer-songwriter Billy Bragg made towards popularising socialist and progressive politics back in the 1980s.

Witnessing him perform as part of the Make Poverty History rally in Edinburgh on Saturday July 2, I was therefore bitterly disappointed to see how firmly part of the New Labour establishment Billy has now become. His adaptation of the reggae classic One love was in particularly poor taste. Bob Marley’s famous chorus was rewritten as “Let’s drop the debt and it’ll be alright”. Very catchy, I’m sure, but does the comrade really believe that?

What a transformation: from all those class-conscious, thoughtful and inspirational songs he wrote 20 years ago to the present day, when Billy Bragg’s material would provide a soothing accompaniment for financial executives in the elevators at the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank.

Phil Rawlinson
Stockton-on-Tees

Bitter

I was a member of the NUM right up until 1985, when I was dismissed for allegedly fighting on the colliery grounds. I was attacked by a working surface operative (upon my return to work), who I believe was put up to it by the then manager, and had to defend myself.

At that time witnesses were afraid to go to my tribunal for fear of losing their jobs, although everyone knew the reality of the situation. I won my claim at the tribunal and was awarded £5,000, which I had to accept due to my financial situation. After being on strike for a year, then unemployed due to my dismissal, we were at our wits end.

When I returned to work after the strike I was the last to go down the pit lane - not by choice, but upon the manager’s orders, as I had been the strike manager during the conflict. I had an interview with the manager who told me in front of the then NUM secretary for Bilsthorpe that if I did any thing wrong I would be dismissed.

It grieved me when all my comrades were give their redundancy (quite a sum) and I had to struggle. The worst about it is that since I was dismissed not one person from the NUM has been in contact or attempted to assist me in any way, after the loyal support I gave before and during the strike period. I had to make my way by myself. The wife and I struggled to bring up three children who went without due to this injustice, and I still get asked if I am bitter. What do you think?

Ron Green
email

Red star ban

Because he was wearing a red star badge during a commemoration of the 16th anniversary of the death of Janos Kadar, vice-president of the Hungarian Workers Party (Munkaspart), Attila Vajnai was detained in Fiumei cemetery by Budapest police.

Hungary is the only country in the EU where the law bans the use of the red star, as a “symbol of autocracy”. Vajnai’s was tried for the same ‘crime’ a year ago, but the Hungarian court requested the opinion of the European court of justice, as to any conflict between Hungarian and European law. No opinion has so far been forthcoming.

About 50 Munkaspart activists have demanded the immediate release of Vajnai and staged a protest against his detention; a petition for his release has been signed and presented to the press. Vajnai was released by the police on July 2. He told me after his release that he had been kicked when forced to enter the police car, and during his detention had been forcibly restrained by a leash.

Endre Simo
Hungary

New international

The rise to power of the George W Bush regime in the United States marked the transition from one world historical period in the epoch of imperialism to another. The 225-year example of the US as a model of capitalist (bourgeois) democratic functioning was ended, and a time of transition was opened. This turn by the leading section of world capitalism toward naked class dictatorship was a conscious act, and was carried out in order to facilitate both the intensification of the superexploitation of the global south, in the name of ‘globalisation’, and the establishment of a worldwide cartel of client states, in the name of the ‘war on terror’.

The invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq represent a departure from the so-called ‘humanitarian’ interventions and wars of conquest of the last decade of the 20th century. The wars of the 1990s were for the division of the world, following the collapse of the former Soviet Union and central European ‘people’s democracies’; the wars waged under the guise of ‘fighting terrorism’ are for the redivision of the world, to secure Washington and Wall Street’s advantage.

But, while this pattern of division and redivision is endemic to world capitalist development, there is an underlying dynamic that is new to the current situation. The need to divide and redivide the world has always been a fundamental feature of capitalist international relations, but the collapse of the former ‘socialist camp’ led to a qualitative change: one of the main players in this game of international capitalist relations - the United States - became overwhelmingly dominant. Because economic conditions at that time more closely matched the level of international dominance, they were able to carry out this necessary consolidation with relative ease.

The latter part of the decade saw increasing disparity between economic reality and the level of power held by the US internationally. This disparity brought about an international policy based more on the need to intimidate and terrorise imperialist rivals into absolute submission. The Bush doctrine of ‘pre-emptive warfare’, while carried out in smaller, lesser developed countries, is aimed at its European and east Asian rivals, designed to organise and solidify the plan for a ‘New American Century’, imposed on the world.

This has been accompanied by an asymmetrical ‘class warfare’ against the proletariat, both in the US and in those states under their domination. The Bush regime’s use of the Taft-Hartley ‘slave labour’ law, the USA Patriot Act and the Department of Homeland Security against the West Coast longshoremen of North America who were threatening to strike, and, similarly, the use of US soldiers and marines as strikebreakers against Iraqi oil workers, longshoremen and public service employees, were meant to send a warning to the exploited and oppressed of the world: step out of line and we will crush you.

In this historical epoch, a greater unity from the beginning is needed. The growth of globalisation, the further integration of the world market and world production, has rendered virtually obsolete the old local and national formations that working people have traditionally built. As well, it has relegated the old internationals of the left - generally based on ‘flagship’ or ‘mother’ organisations based in one country with ‘satellite’ groups in other parts of the world - to the dustbin of history. The degeneration, collapse and putrefaction of the old organisations of the left, and the doctrines that inspired them, demands the formation of a new worldwide movement of working people - organised by working people, composed of working people, led by working people - under a new banner.

This new working people’s international - this new International Working People’s Association - would build on the experiences of the 20th century, drawing out the lessons of the struggles, victories and defeats of the last century in order to educate and politically arm workers for the battles of the 21st century. Many of the lessons of the last epoch of struggle have yet to be fully elaborated and understood, and one of the chief tasks of the new international will be to discuss the experiences that will aid in the education and political development of future generations of working people fighting for liberation and the abolition of classes.

But a new International Working People’s Association would be more than a mere educational institution. First and foremost, its task will be the organisation and mobilisation of working people for their liberation. In order to facilitate this work, we come together around basic points of unity that reflect the principles that guide this new working people’s movement in the 21st century. These points of unity are based on common experience and common understanding, and represent the foundation of our work.

1. The liberation of working people must be carried out by working people themselves; this struggle for liberation does not mean merely a fight for better wages and privileges, or merely for more rights, but the abolition of classes and class antagonisms, beginning with the establishment of real majority rule on its own basis.

2. The exploitation of the producers, of working people, is based on the private ownership of the means of production, and this private ownership lies at the heart of all the misery, degradation, oppression and bloodshed in society, as well as serves as the basis for the development and irreconcilability of classes and class antagonisms.

3. The liberation of working people from this societal system of exploitation and oppression (capitalism) is the central task of all genuine working people’s organisations and movements, with all other tasks subordinated to and guided by this goal. This struggle of classes takes place in all areas of society, but is concentrated on the political battlefield, in the form of a decisive struggle against the state and its organs of enforcement.

4. All previous movements for the liberation of working people failed either because of isolation and a lack of solidarity, or because of an inability to venture beyond immediate issues, or because of subordination to the interests and/or leadership of false friends from the exploiting and oppressing classes.

5. The liberation of working people is not a local or national, but a societal task, embracing all the countries of the world where capitalism exists, and demanding the closest possible unity of working people on a worldwide basis. The organisation of working people toward this end, without regard to ‘homeland’, is a natural outgrowth of the class itself and the conditions that created it.

6. The struggles of working people against economic exploitation are only one part of the broader struggle for liberation. The struggles against oppression of working people based on race or nationality, gender, age, sexuality or ability are an inseparable part of the struggle for liberation, and must be fought by all working people in order to achieve our common goals.

7. The reawakening of working people in this period to their central role in society, their common interests and the lessons given to them by the last century of struggle, while it raises a new hope, gives solemn warning against a relapse into the old errors, and demands the immediate unification of these emerging, disconnected forces into a single worldwide body.

We, the undersigned organisations and individuals, issue this letter as an invitation to our brothers and sisters, the working people of the world, to work with us to establish the International Working People’s Association - to stand together for a new working people’s International based on clear principles that flow from the lessons of the 20th century. This is not a call for yet another ‘workers’ international’ that will be the organised expression of a doctrinaire movement, but an invitation and encouragement for collaboration on building a lasting unity among working people.

The initiators of this open letter wish to establish a provisional contact committee, made up of delegates from each affiliated organisation or autonomous branch, to handle correspondence among the groups involved in establishing the association. This contact committee would also be responsible for establishing and issuing an information and discussion bulletin, and, after it is established, a public central organ of the international. In the future, the contact committee would facilitate the drafting of programmatic, strategic and tactical documents for the association. The question of preparing an international congress will be decided on the basis of replies received.

International Working People’s Association
iwpa-aigt@hotmail.com

Print this page